Rachel Maddow: Women candidates versus womens rights

Last night, Rachel had an interesting segment on the ascendancy of radical anti-abortion candidates in the GOP, including women, and what it will do for their share of the female vote.

This was something presciently referenced by Heather Mallick in that infamous hit piece she did on Palin two years ago: in order to win our vote, it’s not enough to run a candidate with the same chromosomes.

Like this:

Related

Hmmm, self-hating women, these female tea-baggers and GOP are. I can`t figure any other reason.

Ah hell, all those conservative women of today; Suzy ALLCAPS & the she devils of the Blogging SupposiTories; One thing I’ve noticed about the lot of ‘em; they’re even more misogynistic than their male counterparts if that’s possible.

There’s been a huge backlash against feminism over the last twenty years, to the point where many young women equate feminism to lesbianism. They are driven away in droves because they do not wish to seem unattractive.

There was a 16 year old girl gangraped last weekend at a rave in Pitt Meadows by 7 young men. She was drugged and unconcious. Some asswipe had the brilliant idea to record this on his cellphone and post the photos and video on facebook. Someone reported the crime to police after seeing the photos. None of the witnesses reported the crime as it happened or are cooperating with the police in the investigation. Including the girls who were present. The photos have gone viral and police are not able to contain them, but have threatened to charge anyone who posts them further with distributing child porn.

It is practically a no-brainer to think of something other than self hate. I am quite clear that the following is not your position, but it is indeed an alternate that does not mandate self hatred.

Many people believe that at the point of conception, a human being has come into existence. They do not see this as a potential human being, a potential life or a potential person, but rather as a being fully possessing humanity, life and personhood.

Anyone holding this view can do no other but seeing exterminating that person as the killing of a human being.

Now, not all killing of a human being is murder, to be sure. But since the person in question being killed (usually) does not threaten the continued existence of the pregnant woman, and since they have not been sentenced to death through due process, most elective abortions would be seen as homicide by anyone who sees the product of conception as an existing person.

Now, this issue of “does not threaten the continued existence of the pregnant woman” above: everyone has the right to defend themselves. Therefore, if the baby threatens the continued existence of the pregnant woman, that would be a justifiable reason to terminate that baby’s life.

As I said, I know that you (and virtually everyone else here) do not agree with the view that the product of conception is a person, a human, and is alive. But one who does — of either gender — who opposes homicide would therefore, for that reason, have to oppose elective abortion.

Today’s kids often have virtually no concept of the categories “right” and “wrong.” They embrace perversions of bravery like “no fear,” for instance. Previous generations recognize that bravery is the case of operating functionally despite the feelings of fear. We know from that the someone who is not feeling fear cannot be being brave. But to the kids of today, those are foreign concepts.

Because of that, to them, what is is what’s right. People with that understanding will see no reason to cooperate with police.

A second issue: In the teenage mind, which reasons pretty poorly, teen-aged boys equate women being equal with respect to rights as women being unqualifiedly equal. Since they can dominate any boy they can best physically, that then equates to believing that there is no problem with dominating any girl they can best physically.

And finally, they are bombarded with messages promoting that sexual activity is a simple choice, exactly the same as any other choice they might make: whether to eat at McDonald’s or Burger King, whether to play in a given impromptu basketball game on the block, etc. Holding the concepts that “might makes right,” and sex is no big deal, they use their might to have sexual intercourse with unwilling girls.

Some of these world-view components have come in some degree from radical feminism.

By the way, I know all of the positions described above to be absolutely false.

There are things that are wrong.
One of the rights all people have is not to be muscled into doing anything they do not want to do.
Sexual activity is not a non-issue. It is deeply intimate, and important.

So my descriptions above are not autobiographical. I know that if I don’t say that, I will be hit with flamethrowers as if those were my views. Asserting that they are not will reduce the amount of hostility coming my way, at least some…

Not only is feminism equated with lesbianism, it also seems to be associated with male bashing. Yes, man hating, butchy looking lesbians who live all alone & hate kids!

I find young women & girls today have a very warped sense of feminism too, as Kim mentions above. As a result, priorities are twisted. I remembered a friend of mine’s daughter when she started high school; so boy crazy, she started sneeking out of her window late at night (at age 12! Don’t forget) & cut classes on a regular basis. One asked her what she wanted to do when she grew up and all she said was to marry someone rich and be “set for life”.

Funny, when I started high school at 12/13 (in the 80s folks, the crappy decade; Duran-duran, Jane Fonda work out & using a whole can of French Formula to have as big hair as possible), sure we day dreamed about boys and such, and yes, many even wanted to get married and have kids, but for the most part, we all wanted to have a career or even 2 careers to go with that. We had dreams of having it all.

We were influenced by the baby boomers who lived through the bra burning and the sexual revolution of the 60s; they were our parents and teachers.

Like Kim, what the hell happened? It is our generation, the ones who “wanted the careers and the whole kit n’ kaboodle” who are raising & teaching these girls. That is what is perplexing about it all.

Is it because fools like Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter are all they hear these days??

I can imagine HST sympathizing to a minor degree with the Ron Paulies (even I can sympathize with the “restrained government” thing), but he is on the record as supporting left-wing issues and despising the religious right and all the other fascists who came into ascendancy with the Reagan administration. He loved Jimmy Carter :shock:

I wish HST had not left us so early for many reasons, but especially when I imagine what he would have written about politics today. He was a bedrock patriot who would have been outraged by the faux populism, religious wingnuttery and phony opportunism of the Palinbaggers.

(It’s also probably significant that his wife Anita writes for the Huffington Post, rather than Red State.)

Kim – I think maybe feminism was becoming a little too doctrinaire by the 80s, having won grassroots battles like abortion rights and women in the work force.

When feminists should have been focused on more bread and butter womens’ issues, as a movement feminism was getting seriously sidetracked with a lot of comparatively meaningless issues — coming up with a plethora of “isms”, for example. I was once berated and called an “ableist” here for using the word “dumb” :shock: That kind of censorious nonsense is not calculated to win converts to the cause.

I heard about the Pitt Meadows situation… pretty awful, but there’s nothing new about it. The same thing happened in the 70s & 80s, it’s just that these days every kid has a mobile camera phone to record it for posterity.

ck – Feminism can open doors, but it can’t force girls to walk through them. I know one young girl (22) who’s in what I would call a psychologically abusive relationship (and I don’t use such terms loosely). In other words, the guy’s an asshole and treats her like shit, a totally doomed situation but the kid hangs in with him. That isn’t because of a backlash against feminism, it’s because of the girl’s own self-confidence issues.

This is what bothers me about the sidetracking of feminism. That’s the kind of thing we should be working on — self confidence and independence in girls — not whether it’s sexist to call a boat a “she”.

I think a large part of the problem is that our children are being hunted down and brainwashed by Madison Avenue practically from birth these days. They are even marketing to us through our children. They are THE demographic.

If I had a pre-teen daughter right now I’d make The Beauty Myth and No Logo mandatory reading. She would not have a cellphone or internet until she was sixteen. Well, not unsupervised…

Having said that, there are lots of parents out there actively teaching their kids morality and self awareness too. It’s just that the ones who don’t have that support are getting into so much deeper social problems at such a young age. I’ve seen it up close and it threatens to spiral these kids into mortal danger.

This is what bothers me about the sidetracking of feminism. That’s the kind of thing we should be working on — self confidence and independence in girls — not whether it’s sexist to call a boat a “she”.

You know, the late, great George Carlin had a good routine about this sort of thing. Thankfully, my experience with the current generation (“third-wave”) of feminists (e.g., Amanda Marcotte, Jill at Feministe, the crew at Feministing, etc.) suggests that they have taken this critique to heart and ARE focusing more on the bread and butter women’s issues (e.g., media messages that contribute to eating disorders, subtle (and not-so-subtle) sexism in advertising and news reporting, Nice Guys™ and Pickup Artists, etc.). So it’s a little behind the curve to suggest feminists are still getting sidetracked on meaningless issues.

True enough. However, the thing that gets me about “restrained government” is that it’s basically become little more than an empty slogan to be thoughtlessly parroted by the types of low-information voters who attend the Tea Parties. And this is especially true given the hypocrisy inherent in the Talibangelicals’ influence on these people.

JJ, I hope your friend finds her way out of that relationship sooner, rather than later, before things get a lot worse. It often starts with psychological abuse…Believe me, as a survivor, I know that things just don’t get better in these toxic relationships. I stayed, at first, because he was trying to get off drugs and seemed to be making a genuine effort, but when he escaped from rehab, it just became a fear for my own life, but I also knew that I would never have a chance at a quality life if I stayed out of fear. So I ran…and kept running for a better part of 7 years before coming back home to Montreal, for good.

I know that there’s more than likely no way of talking her out of this relationship and all you can do is hope she sees the light.

For me, I have no clue how I got sucked in in the first place, looking back. It’s not how I was raised.

So CK: You have only been in one relationship like that? It’s not a pattern?

Because I was getting all ready to ask you how you broke the cycle, so then I might be able to offer meaningful advice in the future, should I come across someone trapped in a cycle like that, one abuser after another…

Brian, I’m not sure what you’re getting at. If this is an attempt at humour, it sucks.

If you must know, I am happily married now to decent man. I’m settled back in Montreal leading much more stable life. So much for the typical feminist who hates men, eh?

I look today at some young girls, doomed to make the same mistakes I made in the past, like JJ’s friend, and the only thing that comes to me is the only way is to get out. That was not only my experience, but with that of the other survivors I’ve met.

Many women go from one abusive relationship to another. It is almost as if the only relationships they want to be in are ones that are abusive. They say that they hate it,m and they probably do, in all likelihood, but on a different level, that’s the only kind of relationship that the enter.

It appears that they attract abusers as if they were a lighthouse sending out an invitation. They find abusers as if they have some kind of psychological radar or MRI, that lets them see what others cannot: “this man is an abuser, that man is not.”

The hard part for people who want to help them is to get them to stop seeking out that kind of relationship. And also, because this situation is as common as it is, it is a real red flag is a woman has ever been in such a relationship.

So as I started reading your post, the red flag immediately went up, and I steeled myself to find that I was reading a horror story. Then, as the post turned, and there was a good outcome, I started to want to know how you had broken out of that cycle 9if indeed, you had been in it). Finally, your story seemed to indicate that you had never been involved in a cycle of abusive relationships, but just the one.

So I asked.

We all (me included) meet all sorts as our lives progress. If I happen to meet a woman who is involved in an abusive relationship, and who has been in such repeatedly, I would like to be able to help. Advice or insight from someone who has “been in the trenches” can be useful in formulating a plan to help.

Girls and boys who are raised in an abusive familial environment grow up thinking that this the normal way for women and men to interact. The daughters expect emotional and physical violence from their partners as an appropriate expression of love. How many fundamentalist and evangelical christian parents believe that beating children to discipline them is right, justifying it by saying “I only do it because I love them” or “The bible says it’s right for parents to punish their children”.

Some sons grow up to be bullies like their fathers, looking for women to victimize. Some daughters grow up to suffer like their mothers.

Fortunately, those who cast off the patriarchal models promoted by fundamentalism become people who do not need to hurt others or require a religion to justify their pathologies.

“Girls and boys who are raised in an abusive familial environment grow up thinking that this the normal way for women and men to interact.”

Actually, as I understand it, they gravitate toward abusive relationships, because 1) subconciously the think that this time they will be able to make it come out alright and 2) they are actually trying to fix the relationship with the original abuser(s). A tragic aspect is that even if the manage to fix the current relationship, they will, by virtue of having done so, reject the fix as flawed or not being effective.

This drives them to laeve that relationship, and pursue one where a fix will be legitimate.

“How many fundamentalist and evangelical christian [sic] parents believe that beating children to discipline them is right, justifying it by saying “I only do it because I love them” or “The bible says it’s right for parents to punish their children”.”

Virtually no fundamentalist and/or evangelical Christian parents believe that beating children to discipline them is right. Period.

But if what you have in mind is spanking, a formalized punishment, your characterization of that is bogus.

By the same reasoning, using a “time out” is believing that abandoning your child to show them you love them is wrong. Of course, that is a gross mischaracterization of what a time out is, just as your characterization of spanking as beating is bogus.

I mean really: Virtually all parents used spanking as a form of punishment until the 60s or 70s. If this is the cause of men and/or women pursuing abusive relationships, then there would have been virtually no other relationship model.

“Some sons grow up to be bullies like their fathers, looking for women to victimize. Some daughters grow up to suffer like their mothers.

Fortunately, those who cast off the patriarchal models promoted by fundamentalism”

Because of your myopic focus, you neglected to add suffering fathers at the hands of tyrannical women, and you left out the tyrannical women. There are fewer of those cases, but the exist.

You choose to see things through this crippling patriarchy model one which would be pressed into strange service indeed to accommodate the abused husbands, and abusive wives. (Think the situation describe on Pink Floyds The Wall.)

“… or require a religion to justify their pathologies.”

So, if not religion, what do you use to justify your pathologies and/or neuroses?

So it’s a little behind the curve to suggest feminists are still getting sidetracked on meaningless issues.

My mistake for lack of clarity. I was thinking more in terms of where feminism went in the 80s and 90s: I don’t think feminists are on the wrong track anymore. I’m well aware that young women like Amanda and Jessica have righted the ship (and not a moment too soon since reproductive rights have come under unprecedented attack since the 90s).

it’s basically become little more than an empty slogan to be thoughtlessly parroted by the types of low-information voters who attend the Tea Parties.

Of course it’s a totally empty slogan coming from most of them. The Palinite branch of the teabaggers is just fine with big fat intrusive government, as long as it’s intruding into peoples’ private lives and spending billions on wars on the other side of the world. Just not commie health care! :shock:

It is to laugh: Palin herself as governor of Alaska passed a law that forced oil companies to share their profits (ie. “spread the wealth”) with Alaskan citizens, resulting in every Alaskan getting a $1200 cheque (and stratospheric approval ratings for Palin). There’s a word for that… starts with “S”… (and when she arfs about socialism to the teabaggers there’s a word for that too, starts with “H”).

JJ, I hope your friend finds her way out of that relationship sooner, rather than later, before things get a lot worse. It often starts with psychological abuse…

Indeed, it almost always starts with psychological abuse and ramps up from there. It NEVER gets better. Anyone who treats their partner like shit has unresolved issues of their own, and the relationship only exists to serve those needs.

I’ve never understood why anyone would want to stay with someone who treats them like crap right from the get-go. I do understand women who get stuck in relationships that start off good and devolve into abuse, but that’s a different dynamic. I was in one of those myself (and to touch on another subject that’s near & dear to our hearts these days, I’ll give you 3 guesses as to why I never had to run and hide after I gave him the boot 8) )

For me, I have no clue how I got sucked in in the first place, looking back. It’s not how I was raised.

Who knows… some relationships start off perfectly good and go bad when drugs or booze take hold. Money problems can also drive people apeshit, which is why I’ve always felt it’s important to maintain one’s own source of income (hard to do when you have a bunch of kids, though). But this kind of relationship, the long standing one that goes bad, isn’t the same as getting together with someone who treats you like crap right from the start. I’ve had a couple of first dates that sent up those red flags, that’s when I excused myself to go powder my nose and didn’t come back.

But some girls, I don’t know, they seem to think this kind of treatment is funny or something. “Boys will be boys”, that kind of thing. I struggle to keep my mouth shut and mind my own business when my little friend talks about the latest thing her beloved did to make her feel like shit…

I wonder if it is a genuine backlash against feminism or the well published and heavily financed opinion of a few who feel some of their entrenched power is slipping away.

Well said… I think this whole “backlash” thing is a little overstated.

But at the same time, I also think there are *some* young women these days who take for granted what feminism won them, and assume it will always be there. Any 20 or even 30 year old woman today has grown up with the knowledge that they had on-demand abortion rights and not only the right, but the expectation, that they would have a career of some kind and be every bit as financially independent as a guy. Nobody imagines that they could be shoved back into the kitchen, quite easily, actually.

The story goes that when Lyndon Johnson was losing his first congressional election, he put out word that his opponent was having sex with barnyard animals. An aide innocently warned Johnson that this wasn’t true. “Make the SOB deny it,” LBJ was said to have replied.

deBeauxOs – That could certainly be one reason, it makes sense anyway. But it doesn’t explain all these girls, like my friend, who come from normal loving families, yet end up with these boyfriends who treat them like shit. It’s definitely not something they learn at home.

Sometimes it seems to revolve around neediness and lack of self-confidence — “if I don’t hang in with this guy I won’t get anyone else” kind of thing (One thinks: So what? There are worse things than being single, and being with someone who treats you like shit is one of them.)

Good morrow, all!
Sex between two consulting adults is supposed to be an uplifting and enriching experience. That’s the whole point of being in a healthy relationship: that you are happier and healthier in that relationship than you would be outside of that relationship.
Now, just suppose that a man assaults a woman, and violates her with the handle of a broom, or the neck of a bottle, or somesuch shaped object. Would there be any doubt in your mind about the intent of such an assault? Would there be any doubt in your mind about what the woman would have experienced in such an assault, what she would have gone through?
Brian, Jasper, get it straight in your heads: Rape and incest are NOT about sex. Rape and incest are about malice and power. Rape and incest are about showing a woman that she, and all other women, are nothing more to that rapist or incestuous assailant than a mere vessel for that assailant’s need to assert malice and power. Rape and incest tells all women: You are property, and property has no rights or recourse, and what I choose to do with my property is nobody else’s business.
Gentlemen, this IS the 21st Century. Shall we agree on that?
WOMEN ARE NOT PROPERTY. Rape and incest are expressions of malice toward women, and rape and incest are unacceptable to any thinking person of either gender or whatever sexual persuasion.
The problem is, the thinking person is an invisible and inaudible minority.
Rape and incest are not about sex, even though rape and incest display a sexual nature. Rape and incest are about power and property. It’s strange that when you substitute the penis for the broomhandle, alluvasudden, “she was asking for it.”
No. I take that back. It’s not strange. It’s how men think, and that makes me despair for the future of humanity.
God is an iron – CTZen